Ras 18102019 CW 88202019

$~1 to 3 & 10 to 70
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 18.10.2019
+ W.P.(C) 8820/2019
SIR CHHOTU RAM JAT COLLEGE
OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER
EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 8821/2019
SITA RAM ARYA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

AND ANR. ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 8828/2019
SIR CHHOTU RAM JAT COLLEGE OF
EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION
& ANR. ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 5667/2019
LT MAHIPAT SINGH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
EDUCATION AND ANR. ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 6221/2019
MAHARAJA AGRASAIN COLLEGE
versus
EDUCATION & ANR ..... Respondent
W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.1 of 17

+ W.P.(C) 6224/2019
AAKASH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
EDUCATION & ANR .... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 6278/2019
AAKASH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8542/2019
BIYANI INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 4899/2018
MINERVA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 7256/2018
G D COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 7980/2018
OM COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus

+ W.P.(C) 7999/2018
RAJWANSHI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8000/2018
R. B. COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8001/2018
INDERPRASTHA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8019/2018
I. P. TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8499/2018
G. R. COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8511/2018
YADUVANSHI EDUCATION COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
versus

+ W.P.(C) 8527/2018
L.A. COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 8531/2018
SANSKAR STC COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 9795/2018
BABA SHIRDI NATH EDUCATION COLLEGE..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 10269/2018
ADARSH D.ED. COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11924/2018
DIVYAM COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11961/2018
SARASATI EDUCATION COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
versus

+ W.P.(C) 11973/2018
GENIUS D. ED COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11978/2018
RBS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11980/2018
GENIUS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11982/2018
SUMITRA DEVI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11985/2018
DPM STC COLLEGE ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 11987/2018
SMT. G.D. SHIKSHA SANSTHAN ..... Petitioner
versus

+ W.P.(C) 11989/2018
ASHNA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12666/2018
ARYA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12669/2018
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12687/2018
G M COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12688/2018
GITANJALI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12720/2018
BHAI SURENDER KUMAR MEMORIAL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
..... Petitioner

versus
+ W.P.(C) 12740/2018
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12743/2018
SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH COLLEGE
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12750/2018
DR. B. R AMBEDKAR COLLEGE OF EDUCATION..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12753/2018
SSM COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12756/2018
KITHANA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12843/2018

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING,
TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT SOCIETY
AND ANR. ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 12867/2018
GANPATI SHIKSHA SAMITI & ANR. ..... Petitioner
versus
EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 12952/2018
SIR CHHOTU RAM COLLEGE OF EDUCATION..... Petitioner
versus
NATIONAL COUCIL FOR TEACHER
+ W.P.(C) 13037/2018
GEETANJALI SHIKSHA SAMITI AND ANR. ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 13152/2018
BHARTIYA KISAN SANSTHAN ..... Petitioner
versus
NATION COUNCIL FOR TEACHER
+ W.P.(C) 13157/2018
M D COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus

+ W.P.(C) 13168/2018
INDIAN COMPUTER EDUCATION SOCIETY..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 13755/2018
ADARSH SUBHASH TAYAL COLLEGE OF
versus
+ W.P.(C) 13784/2018
MDS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 50/2019
KINDER KIN COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 4433/2019
SMT. KELA DEVI EDUCATION
SOCIETY AND ANR ...... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 250/2019
NIKHIL DANGI ..... Petitioner
versus

EDUCATION & ORS ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 251/2019
LAKSHAY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 254/2019
GEETA INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 899/2019
SWAMI DAYANAND EDUCATIONAL TRUST..... Petitioner
versus
EDUCATION AND ORS. ..... Respondent
+ W.P.(C) 256/2019
DOON VALLEY INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 370/2019
P. M COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 374/2019
VIDYA BHARTI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION..... Petitioner

versus
+ W.P.(C) 408/2019
INDIAN COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner
versus
+ W.P.(C) 409/2019
PURAN MURTI COLLEGE OF DIPLOMA
versus
+ W.P.(C) 410/2019
RAO JITENDRA SINGH COLLEGE
versus
+ W.P.(C) 1736/2019
GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner

versus
+ W.P.(C) 1824/2019
SMT. KELA DEVI EDUCATION
SOCIETY AND ANR. ..... Petitioner
versus

+ W.P.(C) 1855/2019
PARAMHANS EDUCATION SOCIETY AND ANR...... Petitioner
versus
Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Sanjay Sharawat with Mr. Divyank
Rana and Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advs.; Mr. Amitesh Kumar with Ms. Binisa
Mohanty and Ms. Priti Kumari, Advs.; Mr. Mayank Manish with Mr. Ravi
Kant, Advs.; Mr. Abhishek Singh, Adv.; Mr. Rajnish K. Jha, Adv; Mr.
Mahesh Kumar; Mr. Saurabh Malhotra, Adv.
Counsel for the Respondents: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi with Mrs. Preeti
Kumra Nanda, Advs. for NCTE; Mr. Naresh Kaushik with Mr. Dhruv
Joshi, Advs.; Mr. Shivam Singh with Mr. Jaideep Khanna, Advs; Mr.
Samar Vijay Singh, Adv. for State of Haryana; Mr. Karan Sharma with Ms.
Momti Siwach, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER (ORAL):
CM No.49825/2018 in W.P.(C) 12843/2018

CM No.49867/2018 in W.P.(C) 12867/2018
CM No.50626/2018 in W.P.(C) 13037/2018
CM No.19710/2019 in W.P.(C) No.4433/2019
CM No.8661/2019 in W.P.(C) No.1855/2019
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) No.8820/2019, 8821/2019, 8828/2019, 5667/2019, 5667/2019,
6221/2019, 6224/2019, 6278/2019, 8542/2019, 4899/2018, 7256/2018,
7980/2018, 7999/2018, 8000/2019, 8001/2018, 8019/2018, 8499/2018,
8511/2018, 8527/2018, 8531/2018, 9795/2018, 10269/2018, 11924/2018,
11961/2018, 11973/2018, 11978/2018, 11980/2018, 11982/2018, 11985/2018,
11987/2018, 11989/2018, 12666/2018, 12669/2018, 12687/2018, 12688/2018,
12720/2018, 12740/2018, 12743/2018, 12750/2018, 12753/2018, 12756/2018,
12843/2018, 12867/2018, 12952/2018, 13037/2018, 13152/2018, 13157/2018,
13168/2018, 13755/2018, 13784/2018, 50/2019, 4433/2019, 250/2019, 251/2019,
254/2019, 899/2019, 256/2019, 370/2019, 374/2019, 408/2019, 409/2019,
410/2019, 1736/2019, 1824/2019 & 1855/2019

2. Counsel for the parties agree that individual facts of the case need not be
discussed.
3. The core issue which arises for consideration in these matters is as to
whether the applications for recognition of courses filed by the petitioners in 2012,
that is, prior to the ban being imposed by various State Governments for
establishing new institutions and commencement of courses could have been
considered by the National Council for Teacher Education (in short “NCTE”).
4. The record shows that there has been up and down qua this issue since
2013. To be noted, because of the ban imposed by various State Governments,
NCTE issued a directive on 20.3.2013 asking various Regional Committees to
return, without exception, the applications of the concerned institutions.
4.1 Consequent thereto, the Regional Committees at their 214th Meeting (held
between 24th and 25th April 2013) took the decision to return the applications.
4.2 Formal orders were also passed by the Regional Committees in line with
the decision taken in the aforementioned meeting.
4.3 This move triggered litigation, whereby, the concerned institutions,
ultimately, ended up in this Court.
4.4 Some of these institutions succeeded in their writ petitions which resulted
in the NCTE’s appeal committee being directed to reconsider the applications
without being burdened by the ban imposed by the State Governments. One such
order was passed by a Single Judge of this Court on 29.1.2018, in W.P.(C)
No.119/2018.
4.5 Because of this order and several other similar orders passed by this Court,
the petitioners in the captioned writ petitions also approached this Court.
5 It appears, in the meanwhile, the Supreme Court in the matter of Maa
Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
passed an order dated 18.7.2018, in M.A.No.1175/2018, preferred in Writ Petition
(Civil) No.(s) 276 of 2012. Via this order, the Supreme Court ruled that the

application filed i.e. M.A. No.1175/2018 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.(s) 276 of
2012, could not be entertained and, hence, declined the relief to the concerned
applicant.
5.1 Pertinently, while passing the order, the Supreme Court extracted
paragraphs from the counter affidavit filed by the NCTE. One of the paragraphs,
which was extracted, alluded to the ban imposed by the State Government(s) on
entertaining the application for setting up new educational institutions.
5.2 On the strength of this order, the NCTE persuaded this Court in W.P.(C)
No.10551/2018, titled Saraswati Deep College of Education vs. National Council
for Teacher Education and Anr. to decline the relief, which, as noted above, had
been earlier granted by a coordinate Bench of this Court.
5.3 The learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 5.10.2018, extracted the
order dated 18.7.2018, passed in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya case.
The judgment of the Single Judge was carried in appeal. The Division Bench of
this Court vide judgment dated 31.10.2018, passed in LPA No.619/2018, rejected
the appeal and, thus, sustained the order of the learned Single Judge.
6 I am told that the appellant i.e. Saraswati Deep College of Education, also
filed a review petition with the Division Bench, which met with the same fate.
The review petition was dismissed by the Division Bench vide order dated
3.12.2018.
7 The aggrieved party i.e. Saraswati Deep College of Education, carried the
matter in appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court via an order dated
29.7.2019, passed in Civil Appeal No.5923-5924 of 2019, titled Saraswati Deep
College of Education vs. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr set
aside the aforementioned orders passed by the Division Bench and the Single
Judge. The order dated 29.7.2019 passed by the Supreme Court reads as follows:
“Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view
that the impugned orders passed by the High Court dismissing the
appellant's case on the basis of a ban on setting up new Colleges falls foul

of our earlier orders dated 06.08.2018 in W.P.(C)No. 564 of 2018 and
10.09.2018 in W.P. (C)No. 966 of 2018. As a result, these impugned
orders stand set aside.
The appellant's application that is pending before the authorities
may now be disposed of on merits.
The appeals stand disposed of.”
8 It is in these circumstances, the counsel for the respondents have argued

that the matter is covered by the order of the Supreme Court in Maa Vaishno Devi
Mahila Mahavidyalaya case and, therefore, no relief ought to be granted to the
petitioners.
9 Thus, as is evident, both sides rely upon orders passed by the Supreme
Court, albeit, in two separate matters.
9.1 Given this situation, in my view, the submission advanced on behalf of the
respondents would have to be examined bearing in mind not only the order dated
18.7.2018, passed in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya case but also the
relief sought in the application placed before the Court in that matter. The prayer
made in the application is extracted in the order 18.7.2018. For the sake of
convenience, the same is extracted hereafter:
“(a) Allow the present application by relaxing and extending the
last date the cut off date for grant of recognition as 15.05.2018 and
for grant of affiliation as 31.05.2018 for the present academic
session 2018-19;”
10 A perusal of the prayer clause would show that the Court was only
concerned with the issue as to whether the cut-off date for recognition and grant of
affiliation should be extended in respect of academic session 2018-19.
11 As adverted to above, while disposing of the application, paragraphs
contained in the counter affidavit of the NCTE were quoted which, inter alia,
included the following paragraph:
“…9. In addition to the aforesaid communications received from the
State of Haryana, it is most important to point out to this Hon’ble Court
that NCTE also decided not to invite/accept any applications for

recognition of new TEIs from certain states including Haryana from
academic year 2010-11 till the next academic year 2019-20, and it has
been issuing public notices from time to time to communicate the said
decision. The said action has been taken in order to regulate growth of
teachers education at all levels on the basis of recommendation received
from State Government and U.T.’s.”
11.1 Based on this paragraph, which forms part of the order dated 18.7.2018, the
respondents contend that the issue which arises in the present proceedings is also
covered by the judgment in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya case.
12 As observed above, the issue which arises for consideration in the present
proceedings was squarely placed for adjudication before a Single Judge and
Division Bench of this Court in Saraswati Deep College of Education vs.
National Council for Teacher Education & Anr. Both the Single Judge as well as
the Division Bench while declining relief to the petitioner/appellant relied upon
the judgment dated 18.7.2018, passed in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila
Mahavidyalaya, however, despite this situation obtaining the Supreme Court in
Saraswati Deep College of Education case set aside both the orders i.e. the order
of the Single Judge and the order passed by the Division Bench.
13 I have already extracted the order of the Supreme Court passed in
Saraswati Deep College of Education case. I am of the opinion that the
judgement of the Supreme Court in the aforementioned matter covers the issue
raised in the captioned writ petitions. Insofar as this Court is concerned, it is
bound by the order of the Supreme Court in Saraswati Deep College of Education
vs. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.
14 Thus, for foregoing reasons, the captioned writ petitions will have to be
allowed. The concerned Regional Committees will reconsider the applications of
the petitioners in the captioned matters without being burdened by the fact that
various State Governments have imposed a ban on setting up of new institutions
and granting recognition to new courses.

15 Needless to add, the applications will be considered by the NCTE on their
own their merit as expeditiously as possible, though, not later than twelve (12)
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
16 The petitioners will render all assistance so that the timeline fixed by the
Court is adhered to.
17 Since this is an order in rem, the concerned Regional Committees will
consider on merit the applications of even those who are similarly circumstanced
and have filed their respective applications before the ban kicked-in as per the
extant provisions of law.
18 Consequently, the impugned orders in each of the captioned writ petitions
shall stand set aside.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
OCTOBER 18, 2019/pmc

Ras 18102019 CW 88202019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ras 18102019 CW 88202019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

$~1 to 3 & 10 to 70

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.1 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.2 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.3 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.4 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.5 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.6 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.7 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.8 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.9 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.10 of 17

GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.11 of 17

JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER (ORAL):

CM No.49825/2018 in W.P.(C) 12843/2018

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.12 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.13 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.14 of 17

8 It is in these circumstances, the counsel for the respondents have argued

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.15 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.16 of 17

W.P.(C)No.8820/2019 & connected matters Pg.17 of 17

You might also like